- The authority to organise Parliament shall be vested in a Prime Minister, who shall be elected by a majority of Parliament. - The Prime Minister shall have the authority to create and dissolve committees at his discretion. Each bill of legislation must be introduced and passed in the appropriate committee before being introduced in Parliament at large. The party affiliation of the members of each committee must be proportional to the party affiliation of Parliament at large. The authority to organise a committee is vested in the chairman of said committee, who shall be nominated by the Prime Minister and approved of by a majority of the committee he is appointed to chair, and who must also be a member of the committee he is appointed to chair. No man may serve as the chairman of multiple committees, and no man may serve as Prime Minister and chairman of a committee.

OOC: Uhm, I was under the impression that the game sort of tacitly assumed that the nation had been going steadily for some amount of time already. Wouldn't that sort of make an IC Constitutional Convention self-defeating?

OOC: Uhm, I was under the impression that the game sort of tacitly assumed that the nation had been going steadily for some amount of time already. Wouldn't that sort of make an IC Constitutional Convention self-defeating?

Well, we could pretend the constitution that results from this convention is the one we've been using for hundreds of years, couldn't we?

OOC: Uhm, I was under the impression that the game sort of tacitly assumed that the nation had been going steadily for some amount of time already. Wouldn't that sort of make an IC Constitutional Convention self-defeating?

Well, we could pretend the constitution that results from this convention is the one we've been using for hundreds of years, couldn't we?

Ooc: wouldn't you all much rather have me, out of convention, appoint the leader of the majority party or coalition or person most likely to have a working govt to form a govt in the kings name? Otherwise your pm is like a speaker. Which is sort of true but sort of isn't.

Logged

A Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative NE Republican with some Left-Libertarian/3rd Way Leanings. Simply, a Rockefeller Republican.

Ooc: wouldn't you all much rather have me, out of convention, appoint the leader of the majority party or coalition or person most likely to have a working govt to form a govt in the kings name? Otherwise your pm is like a speaker. Which is sort of true but sort of isn't.

OOC: I rather see Party leaders take office. By the way, I listed myself as a member of the National Patriot Party, a small imitation of the UKIP, so if anyone else wants to join, we can be a small block or coaltion partner.

Ooc: wouldn't you all much rather have me, out of convention, appoint the leader of the majority party or coalition or person most likely to have a working govt to form a govt in the kings name? Otherwise your pm is like a speaker. Which is sort of true but sort of isn't.

Ooc: wouldn't you all much rather have me, out of convention, appoint the leader of the majority party or coalition or person most likely to have a working govt to form a govt in the kings name? Otherwise your pm is like a speaker. Which is sort of true but sort of isn't.

Ooc: That'd be fine with me. I just think we should establish some kind of party standings in Parliament, first.

Logged

Barnes MPSpeaker of the Parliament of South AmericaChairman of the Social Liberals

Some random numbers for our parliament... let's say a parliament of 150 seats. This isn't a big country, after all. As for parties... I think we have to have an unclear election result, right? At least to start with. So...

I do suppose that folding the Liberal, PMP and NP parties into one centrist to centre-rightwing party wouldn't be too bad an idea (?) And the Pitfarrian nationalist cause is very well represented right now.

So in terms of the government, I think we're currently seeing the last months of a SDP-Co-op government, with elections imminent.

« Last Edit: June 16, 2011, 01:19:48 pm by The Revolution will be no rerun, the Revolution will be live »

Some random numbers for our parliament... let's say a parliament of 150 seats. This isn't a big country, after all. As for parties... I think we have to have an unclear election result, right? At least to start with. So...

Some random numbers for our parliament... let's say a parliament of 150 seats. This isn't a big country, after all. As for parties... I think we have to have an unclear election result, right? At least to start with. So...

Also, as far as voting on bills go, I think the fairest way to do it would have the RL players to decided internally how their party would vote on a said bill and then inform the Speaker, GM, whoever, who would tally them all up.

Logged

Barnes MPSpeaker of the Parliament of South AmericaChairman of the Social Liberals

I do suppose that folding the Liberal, PMP and NP parties into one centrist to centre-rightwing party wouldn't be too bad an idea (?) And the Pitfarrian nationalist cause is very well represented right now.

So in terms of the government, I think we're currently seeing the last months of a SDP-Co-op government, with elections imminent.

I would be absolutely opposed to merging the LP, NP, and PMP, for what it's worth.

I do suppose that folding the Liberal, PMP and NP parties into one centrist to centre-rightwing party wouldn't be too bad an idea (?) And the Pitfarrian nationalist cause is very well represented right now.

So in terms of the government, I think we're currently seeing the last months of a SDP-Co-op government, with elections imminent.

I would be absolutely opposed to merging the LP, NP, and PMP, for what it's worth.

I do suppose that folding the Liberal, PMP and NP parties into one centrist to centre-rightwing party wouldn't be too bad an idea (?) And the Pitfarrian nationalist cause is very well represented right now.

So in terms of the government, I think we're currently seeing the last months of a SDP-Co-op government, with elections imminent.

I would be absolutely opposed to merging the LP, NP, and PMP, for what it's worth.

I rather see lose coalitions, then 3 main parties.

This. It would be more interesting to have parties with similar, yet not identical goals be forced to work together to form a majority. Two-party or even three-party systems are boring.

I do suppose that folding the Liberal, PMP and NP parties into one centrist to centre-rightwing party wouldn't be too bad an idea (?) And the Pitfarrian nationalist cause is very well represented right now.

So in terms of the government, I think we're currently seeing the last months of a SDP-Co-op government, with elections imminent.

I would be absolutely opposed to merging the LP, NP, and PMP, for what it's worth.

I rather see lose coalitions, then 3 main parties.

This. It would be more interesting to have parties with similar, yet not identical goals be forced to work together to form a majority. Two-party or even three-party systems are boring.

I don't oppose coalitions, I just oppose a coalition with those two particular parties.

The easiest way would be to first determine what sort of election system the country has before figuring out how many seats every party has.

I'm guessing it's some sort of PR, either STV or D'Hondt

Then as the region's hopefully start to shape up, based on their demographics and political profile calculate what the popular vote in each region was at the last election, add the regions together to get a national result, and from that calculate the number of seats for each party. It sounds complicated, but based on my own experience that's the way to get the most accurate results, and it will make things easier for calculating future election results.